comex added a comment.
Addressed comments. Thanks, rsmith!
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaType.cpp:3756-3760
@@ -3743,2 +3755,7 @@
}
+ } else if (D.getDeclSpec().getTypeSpecType() ==
DeclSpec::TST_auto_type) {
+ S.Diag(D.getDeclSpec().getTypeSpecTypeLoc(),
+ diag::err_auto_not_allowed)
+ << 2 << 13 << D.getDeclSpec().getSourceRange();
+ D.setInvalidType(true);
}
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> Please deal with this in the "checking for auto" block at the top rather than
> repeating the diagnostic code here with magic numbers; maybe change
>
> (!SemaRef.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus11 || !D.isFunctionDeclarator())) {
>
> to
>
> (!SemaRef.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus11 || !D.isFunctionDeclarator() ||
> D.getDeclSpec().getTypeSpecType() == DeclSpec::TST_auto_type)) {
>
> up there.
For the sake of clarity, I removed that whole bit from the if condition instead
and moved the C++11 test down to where it sets `Error`. Two bits of fallout
from this:
- `typedef decltype(auto) f();` gets diagnosed there rather than later with a
different error; I updated the test, since both errors seem reasonable.
- A bug is fixed where definitions like `auto f() { return 5; }` were not being
caught with `-std=c++14 -Wc++98-compat`. I updated the c++98-compat test to
add this case.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12686
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
